V.Kanovei says:
>It is you who have to present the intended meaning of your claims,
>be it (2) earlier or (3,4,5) now, both are from one and the same
>wastebasket perhaps even citations from one and the same "essay".
This would be very reasonable, were it not for the fact that (2)-(5)
are not in any obvious way problematic or difficult to understand. When
advancing a "heroic" philosophical doctrine, i.e. one radically
critical of everyday assumptions or everyday observations, it is a
very weak strategy to merely demand definitions and justifications of
standard concepts or observations. In order to make any contact with
the intellectual concerns of those who have not already embraced the
esoteric doctrine, it is necessary to engage in patient, extended,
and careful argumentation. Hume and Berkeley would be good models
here!
---
Torkel Franzen